Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

811 P.2d 1337

Thomas v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · decided 1991-05-29

Relies on Fox v. State · Foster v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1991-05-29

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently August 2025 · most notably Duvall v. Reynolds (1998), Darrell Lynn Thomas v. Gary Gibson (2000)

6 federal appellate · 35 state decisions

3401991200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PARKS, Judge,

¶1specially concurring:

¶2For the reasons stated in my separate opinion in Fox v. State, 779 P.2d 562, 579 (Okl.Cr.1989), I continue to view the so-called “anti-sympathy” instruction in the second stage of trial unnecessary and confusing to the jury where mitigating evidence has been introduced. However, I must apply the majority’s analysis as a matter of stare decisis. I also reiterate my opinion that the “especially heinous, atrocious or cruel” aggravating circumstance is unconstitutionally vague both on its face and as applied. See Foster v. State, 779 P.2d 591, 594 (Okl.Cr.1989) (Parks, P.J., specially concurring). As a matter of stare decisis, however, I yield to the “torture or serious abuse” standard adopted in Stouf-fer. Applying this standard, I agree that the evidence presented concerning the instant murder satisfied this circumstance *1353and that the sentence of death should be affirmed.

/811/p2d/1337 · .json · Public domain